Why run either? Both cards are bad, play good cards, god this thread disgusts me as of late.Originally Posted by Tangle.Wire
Also 65 cards seriously!? Run 60!
//End Rant.
Team Hammafist
@J.V agreed, this thread is stuck since for a while.
So in fact i won't discuss anymore about this deck, as most people just start flaming.
I also get a personal problem by people who only consider J.V's and Rood's decklists to smother any kinds of testing/changing just by saying play list 0815 or change to other deck. So i will stay on 65 cards as it works without any problems (even if it doesn't work for you guys), ill keep trying different cards to give the deck some more individual playstyle (as the basic UGR and UR lists are known as the basic ***** lists).
I don't want to circle around in here anymore so if anyone is really interested by talking about the deck Message me.
greetings and goodbye
-> so the ***** in the text above should be ********, don't know why there is not the word (not my fault)
greetings
Hm...maybe there should be a statistics competency requirement to post here...or someone with more pull then I do could simply explain why increasing variance in your deck is a bad idea...
It makes the probability to draw what you need lower. Mox Diamond must be one of the worst top decks this deck can have when you need a counterbalance for your top, a stifle for your nought, a plowshares for the opposing threat, not to say a FoW on your starting 7 against belcher.
with 65 cards vs 60 cards the difference is somewhere around 3% lower chance to have a FoW in your starting 7. In my world thats pretty much. It also drasticly lower your chances when digging for something with top/brainstorm aso.
Playing more then 60 cards aint allways a bad idea, but then its most likely to have something to do with mana curve, and would be about 1 or MAX 2 cards over 60. I would still consider it a bad idea, if the person playing it can't come up with a mathematical analysis to defend card #61 or card #62.
Last edited by cjva; 12-17-2009 at 05:26 AM. Reason: typo
I still think one would be hard pressed to defend running 61 or 62 cards (though i'd be very interested to see an argument in its favor)...either there are cards that you would like to see over other cards, and thus you run the top 60 you want to see...or if you are unsure about which card to cut (say you are indifferent towards the last five picks of your 61 card deck) one should still be tossed. As you said (cjva) there's no reason to dilute your percentage of drawing a force of will beause you cannot figure out which is the worst card in your deck. Granted that running 1 or 2 extra cards seems have rather small implications...but there's no reason not to take a page out of a blackjack team's playbook. The above is premised on the idea that the pilot of the deck wishes to maximize occurence of most powerful plays and subsequently wins.
My point to. I only said that it might be defended if you have an explanation that comes down to mana draws and mana curves. (read an article who made sence on scg.com)
FoW at your starting 7 is a pretty critical card against some decks, hench the example, but yes. the bottom line is that you want to maximize your powerful plays.
One of the main reasons to play a kill condition like Dreadnought is card efficiency. You want your deck to have as few dead cards as possible, and to maximize your odds of drawing your best cards. This means a few things. First, just play 60 cards. Playing cards beyond sixty means you are less likely to be drawing Force of Will and Brainstorm, and more likely to be drawing cards that are worse than those. This design model also means not playing cards like Mother of Runes or Lightning Greaves. Sure, you'll steal a game here and there with them. But they'll be useless in many other matches. And they'll be useless far too often to make them worthwhile. Having a card that's only good when you already have a Dreadnought on the table is the definition of Win More. If you insist on running a card that can protect Dreadnought from a removal spell, run something like Vision Charm, which has utility beyond saving your 12/12.
I am currently running a 3/3 split between Daze and Spell snare.
Any one tried a 2/2/2 split between Daze/Spell Snare/Spell Pierce?
I'm going to test it. Thoughts?
I would pick 2 and run a 3/3 split, otherwise it gets pretty situational, and you will most likely have the wrong cards, or 'sub-optimal' cards in your hand when a situation arises, and you will wish your daze is a spell pierce or vice versa... bottom line you always lose consistency when you choose utility... consistency trumps all else in my book
Daze is too good not to run 3-of. I know some of the people who really understand the deck have advocated going to 2 Daze but it's really too good in the opening hand to become as random as 2-of creates. I guess the argument for de-emphasizing it is that it has the most value when you are on the play and therefore is a good card in an already good position. I see it as the perfect pitch to FoW on the draw though and I think its value is very good in game one before you know which position you will play from or what you are facing.
Spell Snare is a similarly good counter. It has great value on the draw against much of the meta. It sits well in the hand on the play alongside Stifle and Brainstorm.
It seems to me that adding Spell Pierce to the equation main deck is probably not justified unless you are expanding the overall counter suite from 10 to 12 or you are playing in a meta that is burn, discard or combo centric. The inability to counter permanents with Spell Pierce is a huge potential liability in a blind matchup. If you have room in the sideboard then 3x Spell Pierce would be an interesting addition as a replacement for one of the other counters when they are much less appropriate for the situation/opponent. My sideboard never has room for that level of addition though without undergoing a major transformation as a result and I usually wind up hurting the deck when I alter the sideboard that radically.
I'm not arguing in favor of maindeck Spell Pierce but you should still rtfc.
Good point. I should have said creatures, which is still the vast majority of permanents you'll face. For Dreadstill this is particularly important because of Qasali Pridemaqe.
What should I side in against dragon stompy with a typical dreadstill list? What should come out too?
We run a few firespouts and bolts, but I'm not sure how many of these spells I should side in to have the maximum effect on the game, with minimum dead draws?
I would do 4 Counterbalance and 3 Spell Snare for 3 Firespout, 2 Krosan Grip and 2 Lightning Bolt. Firespout replaces Counterbalance, Krosan Grip is a better answer to Chalice than Spell Snare, but is obviously week to Blood Moon, so two. You than fill in the rest with Lightning Bolts, which are only semi-desirous IMO due to their 1cc.
If you have a Pithing Needle or Ancient Grudge, I would probably cut a Top for it. If you are running them, 2 Sowers for a Dreadnought and Trickbind is a possibility as well (reduces your chances of getting hosed by Chalice and Trinisphere, another card you can cast under Blood Moon).
Generally, I like to keep my threats diverse, because Dragon Stompy typically hits aspect of your game, either your mana base or shutting cc1 or making your spell cost alot. As such, you want to run diverse answers and threats of your own.
So in all my advocating for how much i do not like Urg...i played it at a tourny *in my defense the meta was all aggro having a tarmogoyf to set up walls would of helped*.
@ROOD: I have been doing a little testing and keeping extensive notes for what we discussed on the phone the other week.When you get a chance call me.
@JV: Thanks again for your list.Any more updates on fedora stompy?The supreme blue list you gave me has been doing good in testing and im starting to see the strengths in Urg.Im sticking with Ur at smaller events as i know the deck tons more but i have been running both to get a feel for it.
I hope to see you all of you at the starcity 10k weekends.If your interested in meeting up at richmond pm me i'd love to meet sourcers.
@Neckfire:
Glad that you were enjoying the Ugr list. It's not strictly better than the Ur build, but it also does have some advantages. It has more raw power, since Goyf is better than anything Blue could replace him with. I do agree, though, that there is a reasonable argument for playing without green.
Against Dragon Stomp, you want all of your Lightning Bolts, Spouts, and BEBs. Cut the whole Counterbalance package, including some Tops generally. The reason is that if you can survive the first few turns, you're going to win regardless.
thanks shay.I found that in a all aggro meta where i was playing with tons of zoo and elves the urg version better served me because as you said it the raw power of goyf must be answered.But it also has the pure control elements of Ur so its a nice twist.
I will probably play suprueme blue next time i play there.In case your wondering there is durham northcarolina every sunday we are doing a legacy league.We are also starting one up at tower of games in chesepeak virginia *you guys like my little plug? lol*
anyways back to what i wanted to say.his advice for dragon stompy is correct.All there spells are huge and the accelleration they run is played out before counterbalance hits.Game one use your counterbalance as a pitch spell with force.try and survive the first few turns while they dump there hand.Be very aware that blood moon/magus of the moon is a very real threat and never be caught with your pants down.
after you have survived a couple turns usually a goyf *if your green* or manlands and trinket mages *for ur* will win you the game.of course there is always the 12/12
dont forget you can use stifle to severly set them back in this matchup if they use mox diamond or chrome mox.wasteland is a key component to beating them also.
hey guys in my testing iv found that our absolute worst matchup *at least for me* is merfolk.well when looking at the bant survival list i found some very nice tech.
Llawan, Cephalid Empress
Legendary Creature - Cephalid 2/3, 3U (4)
When Llawan, Cephalid Empress enters the battlefield, return all blue creatures your opponents control to their owners' hands.
Your opponents can't cast blue creature spells.1
i think this card could be sick especially if your are straight Ur im ordering a couple now.
Just make sure they don't have Vial out.
The Source: Your Source for "The Source: Your Source for..." cliche.
Also an answer to Progenitus!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote